Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Rampant.A.I.]

Which component "looks ahead"? The God of the Gaps component?

Good question.

If you read this entire thread, you will see a post of mine where I respond to Alex regarding targets and selection criterion. In it I substitute Dawkins' "methinks" sentence for a simpler one. I give an example of a selection criterion that would select for the exact sentence "I am". If you look at that selection criterion you will see that it is really just a description of the target.

In a sense the fitness paradigm is just a description or blue print which evolution follows to build a particular product.

This is shoehorning "intelligent design" into the theory. The only "blueprints" in evolution is the DNA formed by natural selection.

Survival of the fittest is not a blueprint. Your language here is presumptive of an intelligence you wish to see "directing" the process, which simply isn't there, you continue
making semantic leaps and gymnastics to arrive at the desired assertion: Evolution is simply another term for intelligent design.

It isn't. There are no goals or choices, only adaptation.

I'm starting to think you're not capable of understanding a complex, natural process without the assumption that there's an intelligent anthropomorphic force behind it. Which is fine as an intro model, of for Artificial Selection, but I think you're missing the obvious: natural selection over 3.5 billion years doesn't require blueprints, a designer, or intelligence.


As far as replicating evolution, you've been shown before that Bacteria have evolved and adapted dramatically since the introduction of antibiotics. You keep repeating misinformation about evolution being "difficult to recreate" in a laboratory setting, when a simple google search would show you it is, and has been.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/11/...ever-stops

This article in particular shows evolution continues WITHOUT natural selection pressure.